Citizenship: 撤銷、放棄和恢復
Minister may seek to revoke a prior grant of citizenship or an individual may wish to renounce their citizenship. Resume citizenship~
自2017年C-6法案通過以來一直未更新。具體而言，該網站仍然聲稱，如果某人（擁有雙重國籍）在持有加拿大國籍期間，因恐怖主義、叛國罪、叛國罪或間諜罪被定罪（視判決而定），或曾在與加拿大發生武裝衝突的國家或武裝團體服役，則其公民身份也可能被撤銷。然而，由於C-6法案廢除了由加拿大最高法院（SCCA）提出的這些備受爭議的條款（C-24法案），情況已不再如此。請參閱本週的討論問題以進行更深入的探討。這些不準確之處也凸顯了依賴網站資訊而非最新法律法規的危險性——政府政策網站和指南（例如，加拿大移民、難民和公民部（IRCC）網站）並非法律。
Revocation
第 10(1) 條，如果個人透過以下三種方式獲得公民身份，則可撤銷公民身份，這些理由相互關聯且相互重疊：
詐欺罪 Fraud
虛假藉口 False pretences
明知故犯地隱瞞重要狀況 Knowingly concealing material circumstances
Contexts for revocation
Misrepresentation on citizenship application
Misrepresentation on PR application, even if the citizenship application was accurate
Misrepresentation on refugee application
撤銷公民身分的理由可能發生在申請和取得公民身分之時，也可能發生在申請永久居留權之時。由於永久居留權最終會導致公民身份，因此基於欺詐或虛假永久居留申請獲得的公民身份被視為“毒樹之果”“fruit of the poisonous tree.”。
部長有責任根據可能性權衡 a balance of probabilities 來確立所需的要素（加拿大（MCI）訴 Halindintwali，2015 FC 390第 32 段）。
如果證據顯示某事發生的可能性大於不發生的可能性 evidence establishes that it is more probable than not，則符合優勢證據標準 standard is satisfied。也就是說，法院必須確信爭議事件或事實不僅有可能發生，而且很可能發生（參見Rogan v Canada (MCI)，2011 FC 1007 [Rogan] 第 27-29 段）。
A misrepresentation of a material fact 對重要事實的虛假陳述包括說謊、隱瞞真實資訊或提供誤導性答案。這包括負有坦誠義務的重大遺漏以及故意提供誤導性答案。
隱瞞事實的實質特徵取決於「未揭露資訊對相關決定的重要性」
部長只需證明其具有阻止或避免進一步調查的效果
必須證明的不僅僅是技術性地違反了該法案。Innocent misrepresentations 不應導致公民身份被撤銷
「實質」要素不包括 inadvertent omissions of immaterial information and mere technical transgressions.
Mens Rea
The Minister must have established the individual acted intentionally by deliberately concealing material circumstances or making false representations with the intent to mislead the decision-maker
This mens rea (犯罪意圖) differs from misrepresentation under section 22 of the Act or section 40 of IRPA, which do not require intent to mislead and encompass even unintentional, inadvertent, or indirect misrepresentations.
這種犯罪意圖與《法案》第 22 條或《IRPA》第 40 條規定的虛假陳述不同，後者不要求有誤導的意圖，甚至包括無意的、不經意的或間接的虛假陳述。
In situations where a parent signs the application for a minor child, since the Citizenship Act permits a parent to make a citizenship application on behalf of their minor child, any allegation of false representations or fraud or knowing concealment of material circumstances must pertain to the acts or omissions of the parent (必須與父母的行為或不作為有關) and thus, the child does not have to intend to mislead the decision-maker
Process for revocation
Step 1: IRCC is sending out a Request for information letter. But these letters don’t attach the evidence on which reliance is made. Step 2: IRCC sends out the official statutory Notice with their case for revocation, evidence and a deadline for reply.
Step 3: If your client admits they committed a material misrepresentation, they can ask for the decision to be made under the Minister's discretion. You will need to provide reasons why the Minister should use this discretion. The factors are similar to H&C: establishment, etc.
Step 3 (ditto): If the client does not admit the misrepresentation, the default is a process which goes to Federal Court. (This is less common.)
步驟一：一份「資訊請求函」“Request for Information” 已發出，其中包含指控的基本內容，並提供回應的機會。是否在此階段提交實質資料，還是等待正式的撤銷公民身分意向通知書，這是一個策略性決定。
步驟二：
根據該法第10(3)條的規定，將發出「撤銷公民身分意圖通知書」"Notice of Intent to Revoke Citizenship"。通知書必須列明撤銷公民身分的具體理由和依據，包括部長作出決定所依據的資料。
意向通知書通常以綜合資料包 comprehensive package containing all evidence 的形式發送，其中包含部長在指控中依據的所有證據。
公民有 60 天的時間回應，但可以申請延期 extended。
步驟三：
對此，市民有兩種選擇：
1) 請求部長在考慮個人情況（例如但不限於直接受影響的兒童的最大利益）的情況下作出最終決定（第 10(3.1) 條）。To request that the Minister make the final decision taking personal circumstances into consideration such as, but not limited to, the best interests of a child directly affected (s 10(3.1)).
或者
2）否則，默認情況下，公民有權就指控的實質內容向聯邦法院進行全面聽證（第10.1(1)條）。聽證結束後，聯邦法院法官將裁定部長是否已履行舉證責任，以優勢證據證明其主張。default is that the citizen is entitled to a full hearing before Federal Court on the merits of the allegation (s 10.1(1)). At the conclusion of the hearing, a judge of the Federal Court will decide whether the Minister has met the burden to prove their case on a balance of probabilities.
Personal circumstances
It was not clear in Fall 2021. Three cases were at the Federal Court, where it was being decided whether circumstances in the country of origin, for example, are relevant. Two of those cases have been decided. See the following "Addendum on citizenship revocation cases" for updated information.
請注意，請求部長作出最終決定（第 10(3.1) 條）的請求可以包括對指控實質內容的論證（例如，相關事實是否虛假或是否具有實質性）(e.g. whether the facts in question were false or sufficiently material)，以及對個人情況的考慮，包括一份類似於人道主義和酌情處理（H&C）的同情性陳述和支持文件，涉及家庭安置、兒童最佳利益等。另請注意，自由裁量權的具體範圍和考慮因素目前尚存爭議
Consequences
處於撤銷公民身份程序中的人，在其公民身份被撤銷之前，仍然享有加拿大公民的所有權利和特權（包括護照和旅行）。
due to false representation or fraud or knowingly concealing material circumstances with respect to the citizenship application/process 如果公民身分因虛假陳述或欺詐，或故意隱瞞與公民身分申請/程序相關的重大情況（例如，謊稱在相關期間居住在加拿大）而被撤銷，則該人根據《IRPA》第 46(2) 條成為永久居民。
on the grounds they became a permanent resident (PR) by false representation or fraud or knowingly concealed material circumstances, the person will revert to foreign national status 則根據《IRPA》第 46(2) 條，該人將恢復為外國公民身分。
此外，根據《公民法》第 22(1)(f) 條，被撤銷公民身分的人將在 10 年內不得申請公民身分。
Renunciation and Resumption
根據該法第9(1)條，加拿大公民如果符合以下條件，可以放棄其公民身分：
是加拿大以外國家的公民，或者，如果他們的申請被接受，將成為加拿大以外國家的公民。citizen of a country other than Canada
並非 the subject of a declaration by the Governor in Council under section 20 (i.e. security declaration)
並非未成年人 not a minor
即使患有精神障礙，也不會妨礙他們理解放棄公民身份的意義；understanding the significance
不居住在加拿大 reside
部長可酌情基於人道理由豁免：
申請人必須瞭解放棄國籍的意義，並且 understand the significance
申請人不居住在加拿大 reside
其他要求不得以任何其他方式豁免。
Resumption
A former Canadian citizen may be granted resumption of citizenship under s. 11 if they:
submit an application
were not the subject of an order made under section 10 (i.e. the person’s citizenship was not revoked 該人的公民身分未被撤銷)
are not subject to a declaration made under section 20 (i.e. security declaration)
are not prohibited
are not under a removal order
have become a permanent resident within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act after having ceased to be a Canadian citizen and have no unfulfilled conditions relating to their status as a permanent resident
have been physically present in Canada as a permanent resident for at least 365 days during the 2 years immediately before the date of the application, and
(這裡的 365 天一定要親身在加拿大，配偶是 Citizen 而自己跟他在海外一起生活也不算天數
met any applicable requirement under the Income Tax Act to file a return of income in respect of the taxation year immediately before the year in which the application is made
Residency questionnaire
Types of latent inadmissibility
Criminality
Cessation
The RPD may determine that refugee protection has ceased if, for example, the refugee has voluntarily traveled back and reavailed themself of the protection of their country of nationality. See IRPA s 108 (2) for other reasons for cessation.
Misrepresentation
Best practices
Be honest with your clients. You cannot misrepresent. You are ethically obligated by the professional code of conduct not to mispresent.
There are some cases (refugee cessation and criminality) where time may resolve the issue, if not “cure” it. Explore whether “waiting it out” may open the door to citizenship at a later date.
每個決策者必須決定的問題的性質決定了哪些因素與其各自的決定相關。
根據《移民和難民保護法》（IRPA） 第67(1)(c)條，移民上訴委員會（IAD）必須做出的決定與海外困境相關，因為該上訴涉及遣返令。
但根據《公民法》 第10(3.1)(a)條，部長 Minister 必須做出的決定與海外困境無關， 因為即使公民身分被撤銷，也不意味著會被遣返出加拿大。
法院接著列舉了個人即使在被撤銷身分後仍可申請留在加拿大的各種方法，包括：
根據《IRPA》第 25 條提出的人道主義和酌情處理申請
根據《IRPA》第 24 條提出的臨時居民身分申請
根據《IRPA》第 112 條提出的永久居民身分申請。
申請人可採取的防止遣返的補救措施是依據《IRPA》和 《IRPR》。
例如，申請人可根據IRPA第24條申請臨時居民許可。若遣返程序啟動，申請人可依第50條申請暫緩遣返。
根據IRPA第25(1)條，申請人可基於IRPR第233條規定的人道主義和同情理由向部長提出申請。如果部長認為，根據IRPA第25(1)款或第25.1(1)款的人道主義和同情考慮，或根據IRPA第25.2(1)款的公共政策考慮，暫緩執行針對外國公民的遣返令是合理的，則部長可以暫緩執行該遣返令。
申請人還可以根據《IRPA》第 112 條尋求遣返前風險評估，如果《IRPR》第 232 條中的任何條件適用，則該評估可以中止遣返令。
如果父母在多年前家庭獲得公民身份時作出虛假陳述或遺漏，子女可能面臨公民身份被撤銷的風險。無論事件發生於多少年前，也無論子女是否負有任何個人責任或誤導意圖，情況皆是如此。
*convicted of a terrorism offence as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code.
Pursuant to s. 22(4) of the Act, there is a permanent prohibition from PR to citizenship for individuals convicted of such offences. However, there is an exceptional waiver available in the Minister's discretion under s. 22(5). Note, these consequences are separate and apart from those that may apply to the individual's PR status under the IRPA.
